Chennai Court October 2015 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Masuda Ammal and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Tanjore and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondents police to register the complaint dated 27.8.2015 on the file of the second respondent police.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to direct the respondents police to register the complaint dated 27.08.2015 on the file of the second respondent police. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has given complaint to the second respondent on 27.08.2015, but the second respondent police had not taken any steps to register a case and hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief. 3. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side), on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, petition enquiry has been conducted and the same has been closed in CSR.No.329 of 2012 on 01.09.2015. 4. Recording the submission of the learned Gover...
Marimuthu Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Tuticorin Distric ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer:Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. against the conviction and sentence, dated 13.07.2012, made in S.C.No.57 of 2012, by the learned First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tuticorin.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.57 of 2012 on the file of the learned First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tuticorin. He stood charged for the offence under Section294(b) and 302 IPC. The trial Court, by judgment dated 13.07.2012, convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows; (a) The deceased in this case was one Thanga Eswari. The appellant/accused is her son-in-law. PW11 - Mrs.Mariammal is the brother's wife of the deceased. The deceased had a suspicion...
P. Ramu Vs. Vijayendra S. Bidari, The Superintendent of Police, Madura ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer:- Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act praying to initiate contempt proceedings against the Contemnors/Respondents and punish them for the willful disobedience of the order of this Hon'ble High Court in Crl.O.P(MD).No.21450 of 2014 dated 01.12.2014.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this Contempt Petition stating that even though the order dated 01.12.2014 directing the respondents to provide police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner, the respondents have not provided police protection. After issuing notice to the contemnors, the petitioner has filed this contempt petition. 2. The respondents filed a counter and a typed set of papers stating that on 10.12.2014, an order has been passed by the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, directing the Inspector of Police namely Sugumar, Checkkanurani Police Station, Madurai District, to give police protection to the petitioner and his family. The contemnor has also produced t...
Panneerselvam Vs. Sridevi and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 04.06.2015 made in M.C.No.8 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court, Dindigul (Previously M.C.No5 of 2013 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul).) 1. Gross pay of Rs.46,933/-; net pay of Rs.42,932/-; yet it is difficult for me to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month each to my wife and child - this is the crux of the contention raised by the revision petitioner in this revision. 2. The wife and the minor child filed a petition in M.C.8 of 2014 before the Family Court, Dindigul, claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month. Brief Facts: 3. The marriage between the petitioner and the 1st respondent took place on 04.09.2008. The 2nd petitioner was born on 21.08.2008. On account of demand for dowry, she was subjected to cruelty. The husband filed a petition for divorce in H.M.O.P.20 of 2012 a...
Rajangam Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District and Ano ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer:Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the second respondent herein not to harass the petitioner and his family members in any manner except due process of law.) 1. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, to the second respondent herein not to harass the petitioner and his family members in the guise of enquiry based on the complaint of Rajathi, pending on the file of the respondent in any manner except due process of law. 2. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side), on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by Rajathii, petition enquiry has been conducted and the same has been closed in Current Paper No. N1/26484/902/47/15 . 3. Recording the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) this Criminal Original Petition is closed....
Ramalingam Vs. The State rep. by Inspector of Police Cuddalore
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 read with Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 24.09.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Cuddalore in Crl.M.P.No.1133 of 2008 in C.C.No.132 of 2008.) 1. This revision is filed as against the order of dismissal dated 24.09.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Cuddalore in Crl.M.P.No.1133 of 2008 in C.C.No.132 of 2008 in dismissing the petition filed under Section 468 Cr.P.C seeking to discharge him from the alleged offence. 2. The brief facts of the case is as follows: A case has been registered against the petitioner/accused for the alleged offence under Sections 384, 385, 420 IPC and under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act in Crime No.382 of 2007. A referred charge sheet was filed by the respondent police and the same was returned by the Court below for taking further action. Thereafter, the case was transferred to District Crime Branch for further...
Refex Industries Ltd. Vs. The Chief Commissioner of Customs and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer:Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to re-export two ISO Tanks container Nos.2FLU2013012 and ZFLU2013080 containing Refrigerant Gas R142B imported by the petitioner from China under Bill of Entry Nos.4926248 and 4925897 both dated 18.03.2014 expeditiously.) 1. This writ petition has been filed praying for a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to re-export two empty ISO Tanker containers Nos.2FLU2013012 and ZFLU2013080, imported by the petitioner from China, under Bill of Entry Nos.4926248 and 4925897 both dated 18.03.2014, expeditiously. 2. The case of the petitioner is that Refrigerant Gas R142B was imported by the petitioner from China, in two ISO Tanker containers Nos.2FLU2013012 and ZFLU2013080, under the Bills of Entry Nos.4926248 and 4925897 both dated 18.03.2014. After import, for certain clarification, the goods were not...
Roopesh @ Prasanth @ Praveen @ Prakash @ Ruban @ Kariyan and Others Vs ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Cases filed under Sections 397 read with Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C. as against the order dated 31.07.2015 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Coimbatore in Crl.M.P.No.1897 of 2015 and Crl.M.P.No.1898 of 2015 respectively.) Common Order 1. These revisions have been filed as against the orders dated 31.07.2015 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Coimbatore in Crl.M.P.No.1897 of 2015 and Crl.M.P.No.1898 of 2015 respectively in allowing the petitions filed by the respondent seeking to direct the petitioners/accused to execute their signatures in four languages, viz., Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada and English. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: On 04.05.2015 at about 15.00 hrs, based on the information received from the reliable sources stating that the petitioners/accused seems to be Maoists and that they are trying to involve several youngsters from various States of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Karnataka in the Terrori...
Francis Salaysia Vs. State, rep.by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Th ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the judgment and conviction dated 01.12.2010 by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge (PCR Court), Thanjavur in Spl.S.C. No.44 of 2010.) 1. This appeal has been filed by the accused challenging the conviction and sentence passed under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, under which the accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. This judgment is under challenge in this appeal. 2. Brief facts: P.W.1 is the defacto complainant. On 19.11.2009 in the evening, he boarded a Government bus at Pattukottai along with P.W.2-Senthamilchelvan and P.W.7-Subramanian and they were all travelling to Mogur. When the bus was nearing Mogur, P.W.1 requested the conductor to stop the bus at Mogur bus stop. The conductor had told P.W.1 that due ...
Jothi and Others Vs. Natesan (Died) and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-15-2015
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the decree and judgment passed in I.A.No.912 of 2011 in O.S.No.164 of 1995 dated 21.11.2014 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Tindivanam.) 1. The revision petitioners are legal heirs of the second defendant in O.S.No.164 of 1995 on the file of Additional Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam. The details of the suit is not necessary for disposal of this revision petition. The second defendant died on 28.08.2006. There is a delay of 1356 days to bring the legal heirs of the second defendant, the revision petitioners herein are on record. The trial Court allowed I.A.No.912 of 2011 in O.S.No.164 of 1995 by an order dated 22.11.2014. This revision petition is against the aforesaid order. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently contended that the trial Court ought not to have allowed the I.A.No.912 of 2011 in O.S.N...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »